To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

volttmh i published wkkklt)3y allmand hall tuesday november 5 i>r l-vo , â– ,. /', j,n the r ': n n .' enquit i . when we come to enquire into the spirit of the order itself new and insurmountable objections rise up against it thoseobjec uoiis are of wu kinds tljose that apply '" declaration of war between france u;ul her enemy may no doubt hare opened tome of her colonial ports u our vessels and given tlirin a greater latitude of operation than they Â« on i lir.ve possessed in a time of v r ui course an interruption ol this trade ca'n notbe considered as a restriction upon our natural rights : but there arc other branches of track which neutral nations arc permit ted to carry on between france and her co lonies in a time'of peace which no belliger ent nation cuir attempt to interrupt without violating some ol our natural ri hla let at admit however that " a direct conveyanc â– either out or home u positively inhibited on the ground thai " this would be to obvtata all xhc inconveniences of war and render ineffectual the exertions of the opposite party ;" case of the immanuel 3 kol ad hep 17.2 a willnot follow that 'â€¢ a circuitous traniportation of the produce ol the belligerent colony to the mother country bhould be made a subject of pro hibition some of the writers on the law of nations have attempted to make this oom promise between the rights of neutrals to tarn on their commerce and the right ofa bi iligercnt to cripple the exertions of their enemy that 'â– u ling the goods and pay in ; tin du ii s in the ni u ral i ountry breuks the coi linultyof ihe voyage and is tidi an â– >Â» â– â– 'â– â€¢ n - legalises the trade although thl â– : '- be re-shipped in he same ves el and on ai ( otini ol the s rnie ni utral proprie tor and forwarded for sale to the mother country and this too i is been the doc trine generally pursued by the british courts aid i vi i cxprea ly 1 ild down in the advocate general j n pori of march 16 1 01 enclosed by ovd hawki sburj in his letter to mr king _ the spirit f the hue order of the court ol london howcv is in complete oppositio i to ihis doi tri e ; i i . â– c n ling to the late jiicl u m in the c . ol the essex no part of the colonial p duce of france evel thougli it i ; ? the bona-jide propertyof an ama-ican citizen can be safe from confisca tion unless ii has been re shipped f;ii board of a different vessel j'l ; s is deemed ly them the only satisfactory proof that the co lonitl produce thus exported and destined to an enemy's port is not bona-jidt the proper ly ol il..it enemy inconsistent as these de cisions of the british admiralty have been wil i their previons decisions it is not a mat ter of astonishment that they should be in consistent with neutral nations ! fran the b./hi chronicle li.vi : i si l itoacumenti ul n our c ' . . â€¢ lcb thi examiner text Â«Â« we never fought for n rg i'ublic â€” into which we wttc creed by the injudicious obflinacy of our oppo nents â€” thus oui j'trm cf government was the refult of ne ctffiiy t and not the offspring of catict tl â– mere detention of our vessel and those 11 an ovder we understand was sent to all the out port some da b ago instructing our Â« raizer&to detain all amciicun vessels which liave on board properly not the produce of the united states this order has been al ready acted upon and several ships have been sloppedt london pajter of the 7th august such is the paragraph w lich has already excited so great an alarm among the ameri can merchants an i buuh eheniÂ»iu indigna tion among all classes of citizensi it is to ll rcprtticd that the order itself has not reached us t.t>;n which this paragraph is baid to have been subttuntially t<tkun for we cannot help : â€¢:â– â€¢ \> cting iiiat ii embraces a much widei c'u cle o operation than the or der itself , and we suspect it fur the follow i .' reasons : winch will apply to in ip'-i on which t . i e v will b : lia le lo i mdt miaii m before the courts of admiralty each of these deserve a separate examina tion lst according to tliis order there is not an american vessel having on board any article of the growth or in nu icture ot any nation it war with greai-llritain 1 which is nut liable to uc taken out oi its course and carried into a british port for adjudication whatever bj the distance between them an an i h 9 .' ig y crii icifm . a monthly puplicatlon ut late hat ap peared under the title of " the antholo gy the patrons of which feem tlifpof^tl toenlogize monarchy ami denounce re publicanifm a fpecimen of their poli tical tenets is exhibited in i!:c above quo tation a little knot of critics have i-nlii ted tbcmfelves to " review 1 ' publications both civil and ecclefiaftjcal.--fro(n their performances they appear a of jcholattic pedants pofleued or fuper ficial l.nowlcrfge in arts and fciences and as lociatc tor the purpofe of difpuying their wit ami fa'ifc on all theft fundamential princi|)lcs which ha?c bcrn tliimatecl in i liis country as the bafil both of church ami kate not that we would have church ami flate connected in any one particular to influence the political conduct of the citizen but when a fociety is formed to give a tone to either it is proper tu bring their tcucis btforc the public i'or cxarnina ticn americans if el for instance with a single b.utclotco.'i e on boardfc bound into bordeaux ma be dragged out of ii t course by a i3ri tish privateer and carried into portsmouth for adjudication extreme casÂ«s of lliia kind would certainly be in ich ! â– is fr quent if the admiralty courts shall decide that when tlic c ipt r is ca t in his claim lie shall pay/n i'^/if demurrage ixna ex â– . â– ; lo the a merican vesseli to the honor o the british courts such was their decision in tlie year 1 1 â– '., wli-jn o'n vessels were detained with provisions bound to france and such may probably be the decision in the briti h ports under the new regulation but in the bri tish west-india ports it we ma form any anticipation from a recent judgment in the vice-admiralty court of nassau a different result in iv he reason lbly ( xpected id this case the judge though he determined in fa bi cause the par&g aph which follows i 1 in thi same paper e ilain ilie intention of the order t;j i>c uio re iraini ig < t our i direct trade between the colonies and the mother country through the medium of the united states ; because the letters from the london mer chants to their correspondents in this coun try confine the provisions of the order lo this prei ibu o!>j v:l : because the case of the essex and other vessels which have lately been condemned in the l'.nglish courts of admiruliy is founded c:-.ti:r:y upon this assumed principle uf an unlawful commerce between the colonies nnd the moihei country : an 1 because if their order vÂ«s extensive jn its operation as the paragraph entitles it to ',.â– , it would have the effect of subjecting our vessels to detention and adjudication iho i cv wt re ladeneven with ljii'ish manufac tures in fact according to tlic phraseology of this paragraph not an american vessel could suil on the hi^h seas " having on boai 1 properly >;. â– the produce tif the united stiites whether it consisted of bittish nufactures or j colonial proilufie which would not be liable to detention by british criiuu-s and adju lication by their courts of admiralty 1 lie p re font number is appropria ted to i he purpofc of enquiring whether â– he united stales did not contend for a republic and whether our rcfcnt form oi government was not the " offspring of clioirc il-ufc pofitions arc denied by ihe anthologifts i would afk if we did not choofc a repuhic why did we adopt one when we declared ourfelves iiuiepcndcnt of great britain we were left to our choice tt hat kind of government to orga nize the lablifhment tvai a queftion lubmitud lo the people and it they were not inclined to this form it was eafy for them to fet up another they could with as much facility have appointed a king lotas ard commons as a congrefs when detached from britain every poli ticai proceeding might have as ea'fily led to a monarchical infiilution as to a rcpub lican even in alliance with france the former would have been as pleafing fo them as the latter we had no induce ment to controul us other wile than that prcpouÂ«[fii in favor of an elective o vcr an hereditary eflablifhment the declaration of independence was fraught ith an abhorrence ot monarchy and the writing ol ctmmon senje which gave are imputle to our revolution wire predica ted on a deteflation of the divine right of kings how abfurd then for the antho i gilt to lay that our government was the refult ot neccffny ami nor the off fpring ot choice i would again afk if we did not chufe ir why did we adopt it i w ho turced us to the necejjily of a republic did england r surely not â€” it would have been pleaflng to iherrt to bud we had formed a conftitution analo gous to thelr's ii would have abated their rancor againll or.r independence when they obferved ui inclining to their f|iecies of government for all monsrchiei ate flattered when a people feek refuge un der kings and nobles there was no " nectffity therefore for our adding a republic unlefs we hud been led to it from choice every publication at that peri od had a tendency to fubftantiatc this form in preference to any other through our whole controverfy not one inftaice ap pears that we were ftrcej againft our in clin'ation to take theground we occupied if liereevcr was a government of choice it is thai ot the united states it is an atfront to the undemanding ofthecitizen to alledgc the contrary whoever may be the man thai prefumei to uggefl the degrading idea mult be ignorant of every minutei portion of our revolution vv'licrc relied the power to dictate to the citizens the form of government they fliotild adopt ? who urg^d them reluc tantly to abandon monarchy and afluroc the attitude of a republic i it it was not tjidr choice who controuled them in thru decifion r who among us either in the held or cabiret drove us contrary lo uur wills > where was the riratct who per fuaded us to rclinquifh our dtdrrs for mo narchy and obliged us from r..,.rjj:ty i ( . fubmit to a republic ? such arrogance may he aftutr.cd by a few ieif opinionated novices who hava within a few years tempted to j aim ti ir ablurdities on ihe public a few concei ted upflarts may feel thcmfclvcs above ihe la(hot public cenfurc by nonimom pub lications they may wifh to deprec aio tht great principles at uur revoluti&d by vour ot iiu claimants was generous enough to throw the costs upon them ; and yet this justice oyer h.is been highly praised for his inflexible regard to justice but should it even become a rule mail the admiralty courts of england without excep tion that the claimant when defeated in hjs claim should pay freight demurra md < - penccs to the american vessels though this would cii!!v',i*h the number of detentions and the i -Â» ol ilic american merclunts jtjij the interruption of iwiryoyfiga would sub jei i them to coiliiderable inconveni n e find ex pence the allowing of demurrage and freight might bv some compensation to ihe american merchant or ship-owntr i â€¢â€¢â– ihe cxpe/ices lo which he mould be lial k ; biit instead n such an unlimitted interference with our trade we su ec l that it was the on iy intention of this orclei to instruct their ; r '; iu '-'". lo ileta<n al american vessels v bound o .â– '.;. enemy's colony and having on board any article of the growth 01 manuhc luri i i at 'â– â– '.:' with cireatÂ«liritain v referring to mr king's icu'-r of march 1301 to lord llawkesbiuy o;i a similar sub ject the reader will find that such it least was the practij ol the british cruizers at that period ; and this forms another reason (.,: our opinion that the london paragraph ist has strained the provisions of the order 1 cyond its actual import hut this order eyen with this modification contains such encroachments upon t lie a mcrican commerce as cunnot but excite the (! epest alarm anh indignation a desultory r-.-.-w of this subject will be sufficient to ji tint out the injustice of this regulation nnd t disadvantageous situation to which we b all lt reduced they would not h â€¢ any bubbtitute for the pro fit which he would have made by ihe c:<.nii nuance of the voyage 1 hu costs allowed in i a eomm meaurt of justice are a suflicient < otn j pensatian to ihe injured party il they arc sufficient to reimburse him for all the legal | expences ui.uh he has incurred : because the loss of lime and the consequent loss of pro . fit are so inconsiderable us to require noin ; damnification but in the caseol'acommer but this principle injurious as it would prove t our commerce will be rendered still more fatal by the iniquities which will he predicted under colour of its provisions it would c difficult to place any bounds to the numberless depredations whii h british cruizcrs and british courts in the west-in dies will be encouraged to commit a bar rel ol nailr found on board of an american vessel hax been known to contaminate a whole cargo in ihi decision of a court niul expÂ»se it to confi scation as if it was entirely composed of contraband articles the same dee ision !:. fiv :â– ntly been known to involve the vessel us u.i ;. the cargo in the a ii â€¢ illegal confiscation what right have w '': t : i c'.t that british cruizcrs or courts will 'â– â€¢: in pircd by 1 greater regurd fur our i'i ' â€¢ now than these leci i is have pro ved to possess ? what righi have we to hope that a pipe ci , ine from 1 nuclei ux may not be used as a cover for confiscating a whole cargo andthe vessel itself such at least is v i 1 to have been the fate of the lssex and her c argo but it is not from ilic british agents alone ii these depredations are to ik dreaded ; !â€¢)!â€¢ we iiia oon expect to hear ol a similar orderbeing issunl by the french govern ment " it is an essential character of neutrality to furnish no aids not stipulated by treaty to one party which we are not equally ready i furnish to the oilier if wa permit rorn to l-c seat to great britain and her friends we are equally bound to permit it to france to restrain it would he a partiality which might lead to war with 1 ranee and be reui restraining it ourselvss and permitting her enemies to restrain it un righilully is no diflerence mr jefferson's !â– i to mr pin km v st.|,i 7th 1 t'js the 'â– â€¢â– !â– loctrine will equally apply to restric tions upon our truÂ«.le in the colonial produce we have tlun attempted in a very brief 8e desultory ma n.i to l-.y opi-n some of the i m wliich must result from tlie late encroachments r the british cabinet and british courts upon the american trade these evils we must leave to t'.me itself to unroll " in i the amplitude of their de tail let it not however be supposed that they will afflict our r trying trade alone h cause that trade which we carry on in colonial produre is in fuctessential to the pros perity 1 oui direct trade and our agricul ture : s that part ol the produce which it over a:n above our own ci ii^umptioi , wet.'d i be nothing elte than u burden upon our hands if it were not sometimes exported to th mother country it is probable that these '' s may be arrested thro the remonstrance of our minister in london i j ut should that ' rcmon trance be witliont cffect.it tr ill then ' " the duty ,. ihc peopu to pts ribe the re ' cial udventure thu consequen l-s arc vastly diffcri in by carrying a u el oui pf her de i in i route and . .â– . , â– the ch mce of hi r arriving in pori Â« i bin . â– tain time i he captor prevents the m i ham from benefit ting by the demand of the mai ket and enjoy ing the cxpeeu-i profit of hi adventure this is a loss which no adjudging of d murrage or freight or expenecs i ever suivk i i.t to replace the consequences of this detention are not j however confined to the owner of the ves j sel or the cargo but they are made to ex i tend also to the crew during every war v which the english nation lus been enga ged the most unauthorised meabiires have â€¢ been employed for the impressment of bea i men but at no period has this practice been more widely extended than during the pre mmt w:ir which may in fact be principally ; igardedasa war on ths seas surely we ,' have no just reason to hope that our uÂ»n ci it has generally been the custom when a ny new principle is adopted by a belligerent n ion or vmi;i any olil one is carried into Â«.;: rali in to r^-i > c i previous notice to the ministers resident of neutral nations thai they rmy have it in their power to put their counti u i l :!'â– â€¢'â€¢â€¢! u;ir;l when a port is declared ti lie in p mate of blockade there in always a provision in favour of such ves sels as nnj have left their country befoi'e t ik i i ... i â– '..;! 'â– >{' the blockade could have r rived there but no such provision has been made in the present instanct '. an order linn been given by the brit h government for detaining on v â– el . laden with particular cargoes aiul bound for parti ular ports and without having given the least previous no libcatioi i il â– : i <!< . .> u it is immediately .. tec on vessels which are laden in this particular way and bound to partii ular ports hava no i'ic least opportunity of cscj : .. the ope r ionofthislx-post-factoluw their comman . rshavenot the l ist doubt bulthut tin y are c irrying on not only a regular trud , but a trade which hasbeen expressly sanctioned bj the british government when contrary to all reasonable expectation they arc do tainedby uriiiih cruizera and carried into port for adjudication they wer ignorant ofthe very existence of the law ; they were conmqui nily ; i enti 1 from i iking the ne cessary j cunt ii i and yet they arc expo sed to its moni rigorous penalties can uiis be called justice ! the del ntion and con deinnatinn of american propel y in this way alone will involve u iom of property aim i beyond calcul tion hundrt is oi carg arts now afloat which have hern shipped i i si it forward in he same vessels in wh i li they were imported thever matin > <â– - j vt of carry ing this ordi i in i effect i drays an astonishing disrc ard i f o'u i : . , i 'Â« and ul the practice of nations and kci '. .Â» â– . v liable i in almost incakuhiblc : â€¢Â». ; tizens will be exempted from the same in : j istice which has been so largely dealt out to j british subjects we know that they have j lately impressed our seamen on the high i s.-as tttthe mouth of our harbours and in ; o ii 1 own osscn why houm they be more â– secure within the british harbours ? when ; the american vessel were detained and sent i into port according to tin instructions fur . nished to the british cruisers in i7 our i seamen were impressed and mr i'inckney j remonstrated to lord grenville why i should they expect to enjoy a better f*te under the present regulation in the words of mr pinckney therefore 'â€¢ their beiug captured and brought into jlritioii ports i renders our seamen liable to those duadvan ! tages they would otherwise have avoided sd but the principle on which these ves j bcis when once detained and carried into > port ore to be condemned by the courts of j admiralty i is no ii:ss injurious to our interests jt than the act oicle aim g them 'â€¢ one rc ! gtriction on their natural rights says mr jtffer&on p 1:7 of via official corrcspon j dtn e has been submitted to l nations at i peaci ; that is l gay that of not furnishing to cither party implements merely of war ; for iliu annoyance of i he other nor any inn whatever to a place vockadedby its enemy , la il no ili ! i vii lation oi our n ituial ri hts : that any prohibition should be placed upon i ihe dii â– trade which we carry on between the in itlx r i ountry and hei colon ; between france for en implc ai.u maitinicjuc ? i he wilmington gazette

The SA of NC considers this item in the public domain by U.S. law but responsibility for permissions rests with researchers.

Language

eng

FullText

volttmh i published wkkklt)3y allmand hall tuesday november 5 i>r l-vo , â– ,. /', j,n the r ': n n .' enquit i . when we come to enquire into the spirit of the order itself new and insurmountable objections rise up against it thoseobjec uoiis are of wu kinds tljose that apply '" declaration of war between france u;ul her enemy may no doubt hare opened tome of her colonial ports u our vessels and given tlirin a greater latitude of operation than they Â« on i lir.ve possessed in a time of v r ui course an interruption ol this trade ca'n notbe considered as a restriction upon our natural rights : but there arc other branches of track which neutral nations arc permit ted to carry on between france and her co lonies in a time'of peace which no belliger ent nation cuir attempt to interrupt without violating some ol our natural ri hla let at admit however that " a direct conveyanc â– either out or home u positively inhibited on the ground thai " this would be to obvtata all xhc inconveniences of war and render ineffectual the exertions of the opposite party ;" case of the immanuel 3 kol ad hep 17.2 a willnot follow that 'â€¢ a circuitous traniportation of the produce ol the belligerent colony to the mother country bhould be made a subject of pro hibition some of the writers on the law of nations have attempted to make this oom promise between the rights of neutrals to tarn on their commerce and the right ofa bi iligercnt to cripple the exertions of their enemy that 'â– u ling the goods and pay in ; tin du ii s in the ni u ral i ountry breuks the coi linultyof ihe voyage and is tidi an â– >Â» â– â– 'â– â€¢ n - legalises the trade although thl â– : '- be re-shipped in he same ves el and on ai ( otini ol the s rnie ni utral proprie tor and forwarded for sale to the mother country and this too i is been the doc trine generally pursued by the british courts aid i vi i cxprea ly 1 ild down in the advocate general j n pori of march 16 1 01 enclosed by ovd hawki sburj in his letter to mr king _ the spirit f the hue order of the court ol london howcv is in complete oppositio i to ihis doi tri e ; i i . â– c n ling to the late jiicl u m in the c . ol the essex no part of the colonial p duce of france evel thougli it i ; ? the bona-jide propertyof an ama-ican citizen can be safe from confisca tion unless ii has been re shipped f;ii board of a different vessel j'l ; s is deemed ly them the only satisfactory proof that the co lonitl produce thus exported and destined to an enemy's port is not bona-jidt the proper ly ol il..it enemy inconsistent as these de cisions of the british admiralty have been wil i their previons decisions it is not a mat ter of astonishment that they should be in consistent with neutral nations ! fran the b./hi chronicle li.vi : i si l itoacumenti ul n our c ' . . â€¢ lcb thi examiner text Â«Â« we never fought for n rg i'ublic â€” into which we wttc creed by the injudicious obflinacy of our oppo nents â€” thus oui j'trm cf government was the refult of ne ctffiiy t and not the offspring of catict tl â– mere detention of our vessel and those 11 an ovder we understand was sent to all the out port some da b ago instructing our Â« raizer&to detain all amciicun vessels which liave on board properly not the produce of the united states this order has been al ready acted upon and several ships have been sloppedt london pajter of the 7th august such is the paragraph w lich has already excited so great an alarm among the ameri can merchants an i buuh eheniÂ»iu indigna tion among all classes of citizensi it is to ll rcprtticd that the order itself has not reached us t.t>;n which this paragraph is baid to have been subttuntially t cting iiiat ii embraces a much widei c'u cle o operation than the or der itself , and we suspect it fur the follow i .' reasons : winch will apply to in ip'-i on which t . i e v will b : lia le lo i mdt miaii m before the courts of admiralty each of these deserve a separate examina tion lst according to tliis order there is not an american vessel having on board any article of the growth or in nu icture ot any nation it war with greai-llritain 1 which is nut liable to uc taken out oi its course and carried into a british port for adjudication whatever bj the distance between them an an i h 9 .' ig y crii icifm . a monthly puplicatlon ut late hat ap peared under the title of " the antholo gy the patrons of which feem tlifpof^tl toenlogize monarchy ami denounce re publicanifm a fpecimen of their poli tical tenets is exhibited in i!:c above quo tation a little knot of critics have i-nlii ted tbcmfelves to " review 1 ' publications both civil and ecclefiaftjcal.--fro(n their performances they appear a of jcholattic pedants pofleued or fuper ficial l.nowlcrfge in arts and fciences and as lociatc tor the purpofe of difpuying their wit ami fa'ifc on all theft fundamential princi|)lcs which ha?c bcrn tliimatecl in i liis country as the bafil both of church ami kate not that we would have church ami flate connected in any one particular to influence the political conduct of the citizen but when a fociety is formed to give a tone to either it is proper tu bring their tcucis btforc the public i'or cxarnina ticn americans if el for instance with a single b.utclotco.'i e on boardfc bound into bordeaux ma be dragged out of ii t course by a i3ri tish privateer and carried into portsmouth for adjudication extreme casÂ«s of lliia kind would certainly be in ich ! â– is fr quent if the admiralty courts shall decide that when tlic c ipt r is ca t in his claim lie shall pay/n i'^/if demurrage ixna ex â– . â– ; lo the a merican vesseli to the honor o the british courts such was their decision in tlie year 1 1 â– '., wli-jn o'n vessels were detained with provisions bound to france and such may probably be the decision in the briti h ports under the new regulation but in the bri tish west-india ports it we ma form any anticipation from a recent judgment in the vice-admiralty court of nassau a different result in iv he reason lbly ( xpected id this case the judge though he determined in fa bi cause the par&g aph which follows i 1 in thi same paper e ilain ilie intention of the order t;j i>c uio re iraini ig < t our i direct trade between the colonies and the mother country through the medium of the united states ; because the letters from the london mer chants to their correspondents in this coun try confine the provisions of the order lo this prei ibu o!>j v:l : because the case of the essex and other vessels which have lately been condemned in the l'.nglish courts of admiruliy is founded c:-.ti:r:y upon this assumed principle uf an unlawful commerce between the colonies nnd the moihei country : an 1 because if their order vÂ«s extensive jn its operation as the paragraph entitles it to ',.â– , it would have the effect of subjecting our vessels to detention and adjudication iho i cv wt re ladeneven with ljii'ish manufac tures in fact according to tlic phraseology of this paragraph not an american vessel could suil on the hi^h seas " having on boai 1 properly >;. â– the produce tif the united stiites whether it consisted of bittish nufactures or j colonial proilufie which would not be liable to detention by british criiuu-s and adju lication by their courts of admiralty 1 lie p re font number is appropria ted to i he purpofc of enquiring whether â– he united stales did not contend for a republic and whether our rcfcnt form oi government was not the " offspring of clioirc il-ufc pofitions arc denied by ihe anthologifts i would afk if we did not choofc a repuhic why did we adopt one when we declared ourfelves iiuiepcndcnt of great britain we were left to our choice tt hat kind of government to orga nize the lablifhment tvai a queftion lubmitud lo the people and it they were not inclined to this form it was eafy for them to fet up another they could with as much facility have appointed a king lotas ard commons as a congrefs when detached from britain every poli ticai proceeding might have as ea'fily led to a monarchical infiilution as to a rcpub lican even in alliance with france the former would have been as pleafing fo them as the latter we had no induce ment to controul us other wile than that prcpouÂ«[fii in favor of an elective o vcr an hereditary eflablifhment the declaration of independence was fraught ith an abhorrence ot monarchy and the writing ol ctmmon senje which gave are imputle to our revolution wire predica ted on a deteflation of the divine right of kings how abfurd then for the antho i gilt to lay that our government was the refult ot neccffny ami nor the off fpring ot choice i would again afk if we did not chufe ir why did we adopt it i w ho turced us to the necejjily of a republic did england r surely not â€” it would have been pleaflng to iherrt to bud we had formed a conftitution analo gous to thelr's ii would have abated their rancor againll or.r independence when they obferved ui inclining to their f|iecies of government for all monsrchiei ate flattered when a people feek refuge un der kings and nobles there was no " nectffity therefore for our adding a republic unlefs we hud been led to it from choice every publication at that peri od had a tendency to fubftantiatc this form in preference to any other through our whole controverfy not one inftaice ap pears that we were ftrcej againft our in clin'ation to take theground we occupied if liereevcr was a government of choice it is thai ot the united states it is an atfront to the undemanding ofthecitizen to alledgc the contrary whoever may be the man thai prefumei to uggefl the degrading idea mult be ignorant of every minutei portion of our revolution vv'licrc relied the power to dictate to the citizens the form of government they fliotild adopt ? who urg^d them reluc tantly to abandon monarchy and afluroc the attitude of a republic i it it was not tjidr choice who controuled them in thru decifion r who among us either in the held or cabiret drove us contrary lo uur wills > where was the riratct who per fuaded us to rclinquifh our dtdrrs for mo narchy and obliged us from r..,.rjj:ty i ( . fubmit to a republic ? such arrogance may he aftutr.cd by a few ieif opinionated novices who hava within a few years tempted to j aim ti ir ablurdities on ihe public a few concei ted upflarts may feel thcmfclvcs above ihe la(hot public cenfurc by nonimom pub lications they may wifh to deprec aio tht great principles at uur revoluti&d by vour ot iiu claimants was generous enough to throw the costs upon them ; and yet this justice oyer h.is been highly praised for his inflexible regard to justice but should it even become a rule mail the admiralty courts of england without excep tion that the claimant when defeated in hjs claim should pay freight demurra md < - penccs to the american vessels though this would cii!!v',i*h the number of detentions and the i -Â» ol ilic american merclunts jtjij the interruption of iwiryoyfiga would sub jei i them to coiliiderable inconveni n e find ex pence the allowing of demurrage and freight might bv some compensation to ihe american merchant or ship-owntr i â€¢â€¢â– ihe cxpe/ices lo which he mould be lial k ; biit instead n such an unlimitted interference with our trade we su ec l that it was the on iy intention of this orclei to instruct their ; r '; iu '-'". lo ileta c i previous notice to the ministers resident of neutral nations thai they rmy have it in their power to put their counti u i l :!'â– â€¢'â€¢â€¢! u;ir;l when a port is declared ti lie in p mate of blockade there in always a provision in favour of such ves sels as nnj have left their country befoi'e t ik i i ... i â– '..;! 'â– >{' the blockade could have r rived there but no such provision has been made in the present instanct '. an order linn been given by the brit h government for detaining on v â– el . laden with particular cargoes aiul bound for parti ular ports and without having given the least previous no libcatioi i il â– : i u it is immediately .. tec on vessels which are laden in this particular way and bound to partii ular ports hava no i'ic least opportunity of cscj : .. the ope r ionofthislx-post-factoluw their comman . rshavenot the l ist doubt bulthut tin y are c irrying on not only a regular trud , but a trade which hasbeen expressly sanctioned bj the british government when contrary to all reasonable expectation they arc do tainedby uriiiih cruizera and carried into port for adjudication they wer ignorant ofthe very existence of the law ; they were conmqui nily ; i enti 1 from i iking the ne cessary j cunt ii i and yet they arc expo sed to its moni rigorous penalties can uiis be called justice ! the del ntion and con deinnatinn of american propel y in this way alone will involve u iom of property aim i beyond calcul tion hundrt is oi carg arts now afloat which have hern shipped i i si it forward in he same vessels in wh i li they were imported thever matin > port ore to be condemned by the courts of j admiralty i is no ii:ss injurious to our interests jt than the act oicle aim g them 'â€¢ one rc ! gtriction on their natural rights says mr jtffer&on p 1:7 of via official corrcspon j dtn e has been submitted to l nations at i peaci ; that is l gay that of not furnishing to cither party implements merely of war ; for iliu annoyance of i he other nor any inn whatever to a place vockadedby its enemy , la il no ili ! i vii lation oi our n ituial ri hts : that any prohibition should be placed upon i ihe dii â– trade which we carry on between the in itlx r i ountry and hei colon ; between france for en implc ai.u maitinicjuc ? i he wilmington gazette